[PATCH net-next v5 2/2] net: ethernet: socionext: add AVE ethernet driver

[Masami Hiramatsu]

Hi Russell,

2017-12-11 22:46 GMT+09:00 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at armlinux.org.uk>:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:34:17PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> IMHO, even if we use SPDX license identifier, I recommend to use
>> C-style comments as many other files do, since it is C code.
>> If SPDX identifier requires C++ style, that is SPDX parser's issue
>> and should be fixed to get it from C-style comment.
>
> See the numerous emails on this subject already.  The issue of C
> vs C++ comments has come up many times by many different people, but
> the result is the same.  That's not going to happen.  Linux kernel
> C files are required to use "//" for the SPDX identifier by order
> of Linus Torvalds.

OK, I got it.

>
> Linus has also revealed in that discussion that he has a preference
> for "//" style commenting for single comments, so it seems that the
> kernel coding style may change - but there is no desire for patches
> to "clean up" single line comments to use "//".

Thank you for making it clear.

Then what I'm considering is copyright notice lines. Those are usually
treat as the header lines, not single line. So

> +// SDPX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +// sni_ave.c - Socionext UniPhier AVE ethernet driver
> +// Copyright 2014 Panasonic Corporation
> +// Copyright 2015-2017 Socionext Inc.

is acceptable? or should we keep C-style header lines for new drivers?

> +// SDPX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * sni_ave.c - Socionext UniPhier AVE ethernet driver
> + * Copyright 2014 Panasonic Corporation
> + * Copyright 2015-2017 Socionext Inc.
> + */

I just concern that those lines are not "single". that's all. :)

>
> For further information, and to see the discussion that has already
> happened, the arguments that have been made about style, see the
> threads for the patch series that tglx has been posting wrt documenting
> the SPDX stuff for the kernel.

OK, got it.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/16/663


Thanks,

>
> Thanks (let's stop rehashing the same arguments.)
>


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu